On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Eliot Miranda wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 9:52 AM David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>       On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 09:32:17AM -0800, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>       > Hi All,
>       >
>       >     In VisualWorks Message implements #= & #hash naturally; two messages
>       > whose selectors and arguments are #= are also equal.  But in Cuis, Squeak
>       > and Pharo Message inherits #= and #hash from Object, i.e. uses identity
>       > comparison.  This is, to say the least, annoying.  Any objections to
>       > implementing comparing in Message to match VisualWorks?
>       >
>
>       That sounds like an obviously good thing to do :-)
>
>       Is the lookupClass instance variable relevant for comparisons? I am
>       guessing not, since we already have #analogousCodeTo: for that type of
>       comparison.
> 
> 
> For me it is relevant.  Two messages with different lookupClasses, e.g. one with nil and one with a specific class, represent different messages, one a normal send one a super send.  So my changes in
> waiting include lookupClass in both hash and =.  I don't think it makes much difference, but the incompatibility with VisualWorks, while regrettable, feels correct to me.

What about Behavior >> #hash? It uses the name of the class, which is fine 
as long as you don't rename your classes while you store them in hashed 
collections.

Levente

>
>       Dave
> 
> 
> _,,,^..^,,,_
> best, Eliot
> 
>